robertmrivers
Orange Belt
Oh...if you don't mind, let me see what I am doing in April, maybe I can introduce myself to you and sneak a little HR in... What's the date?
Rob
Rob
Looking for in depth information on Naihanji Hyungs
- Thread starter Jep
- Start date
JT_the_Ninja
Black Belt
Hey, I see you're not a TSD practicioner. That's cool. Don't say your system is any better than ours. Our basic techniques and forms may have originated elsewhere, but now we've made them ours. Okay? If it was originally something else in another style, cool. That may shed some light on what other people thought. Now, however, they're taught differently because the forms themselves have changed. There is no right vs. wrong issue here. I'm not arguing that the way they do it in Okinawa isn't a valid way.
All I'm saying is quit with the TSD-bashing - and that goes for you TSD people too! The Koreans have not been doing it wrong all these years, they've been doing it their way, and correctly their way. I personally find their way very effective. The keema hyung not only show me how to fight while I'm against a wall, they ensure that I'm practicing a good horse stance and using my waist for power instead of my shoulders. Don't come in here, Mr. Japanese-style, and tell us you're better than us. That's rude and ignorant, and maybe an issue for which a moderator should deal with you.
JT
What if I told you that by listening to some of these Okinawan and Japanese practicioners, you could have a much deeper understanding of the form? Would you be able to accept that? Think of it as learning how to see things from a different perspective.
This is an open door, JT, and no body has to be right or wrong. Us TSD practicioners who seem to be bashing our art are meerly standing on the other side of the door. If you want to come through fine, if not fine, but the end result is that it will change your art.
It changed everything about my art. Take a look at this...
http://www.martialtalk.com/forum/showthread.php?t=34158
This is the curriculum in my school and its all there, right in the forms, if you know where to look for it. They link everything together and those connections give it more meaning and even more usefullness.
This is all just a journey in which we are all moving toward a better understanding of what me know. I've taken alot of steps on my journey and none of them have been wrong for me. And I still have a long way to go.
More food for thought...
http://www.martialtalk.com/forum/showthread.php?t=31764
http://www.martialtalk.com/forum/showthread.php?t=32622
http://www.martialtalk.com/forum/showthread.php?t=31800
http://www.martialtalk.com/forum/showthread.php?t=43916
I didn't notice any rudeness or ignorance—or name-calling or belligerance—in Mr. River's post, at least.
People are trying to tell you that there's a source of insight into something you do which you haven't accessed—the guy who wrote the code for software you use constantly is available to give you ideas on how to use it better—and you write posts like the one I'm quoting from?
You're making a great impression, JT... :EG:
robertmrivers
Orange Belt
Now, Now, Now...
I must apologize...I read back through my post and the last sentence where I used the word "wrong" was inappropriate. It was not my intent to compare styles or flame any particular style...
I would like to mention, though, that the question was how to find more information on the Naihanchi. JT, your stance on the matter is very rigid and because of your devotion to the Korean method (which is admirable by the way), you are shutting the door on, not just "another way of doing it", but historical fact. In doing so, you are setting the example to others that they should not research their history. I just don't agree with this. Simply, to get a better understanding of Naihanchi...the history, the philosophy, and the higher meaning you MUST look elsewhere. I AM NOT talking about getting a higher understanding of how to punch or how to fight against a wall... everyone can work on that on their own. I have seen plenty of TSD people who can punch a hole through many an Okinawan stylist. What I am talking about is getting a higher understanding of Naihanchi as an actual historical document. And, you can't learn about the past if you are not willing to dig. Digging usually brings up things we are not too crazy about but we deal with it and move on. I have dug up plenty of my own skeletons during my journey that contradict truth but I have always been encouraged to bury those skeletons elsewhere and keep digging for the truth.
As an Okinawan stylist, I have also done my share of research. For example, research into Naihanchi always leads to Motobu Choki as this was the only kata he taught as he felt it contained everything one needs. So, who better to talk to about this than Motobu's son, Motobu Chosei Soke. Next thing you know, Motobu Sensei is in my living room eating dinner with my family. This year will be his third visit.
And it goes deeper. I have looked into the Chinese roots of Naihanchi and how it came to be in Okinawa focusing especially on the specialized tactics found in the kata. THIS is why when I hear about "fighting against a wall" I just can't let it go. It is just not historically accurate. If you want to modify the technique...any technique, to fight against a wall go for it. Every system on earth has it, including karate. Applying this tactical concept is essential to true self defense. But, everyone needs to admit that the reason they choose Naihanchi to use as a wall fighting kata is the pattern. You can do the same thing with any of the kata...this doesn't make them wall fighting kata as well. Historically speaking, the pattern is only there to help the practitioner remember the form. It lays no significance as to the meaning of the form...in fact, the movements were set in certain patterns and directions to INTENTIONALLY mislead on- lookers. In the case of Naihanchi, the originators were successful on a global scale!
There is no "mine is better" arguement here. However, at times, different instructors are going to have a "my historical perspective of this particular topic may be a bit more accurate than yours". But, that will only come out when a particular question is asked...as in this case concerning the research of Naihanchi. In my case, no offense is intended. I am trying to answer questions concerning a topic that always ends in a "mine is better than yours" arguement. I hope I can make my points without anyone going there. In college, I didn't think my professors were "better than me". They simply knew more about the subject than I did at the time and I was, in fact, the one asking the questions in an effort to learn more. If I started an arguement with a professor every time they corrected me I would still be in college.
Shotokan instructors go back to Okinawa all the time to learn the roots of what they learn. Some convert but most continue practicing Shotokan the way it was taught to them. TSD practitioners have a great art full of power, as well. Nobody is asking them to convert, either. Learning about the past is not going to "entice" one to convert. The roots of my family are in Scotland... it doesn't mean I want to start wearing a kilt. I am not the one asking the questions. It is TSD students who are asking the questions so that they can better understand what they are doing. All I am doing is answering the questions. Following the example of Shotokan and Okinawan karate practitioners alike, students must be encouraged to research the history of what they do. Tang, afterall, refers to China...not Korea. If you are not thinking about the "why" of that (beyond the technical definition), you're missing a really fun part of the journey. Karate, before it was called karate in Okinawa, was called Todi (To-China, Di- Hand) or as we say in Korean...Tang Soo. We are all linked brothers and sisters. Resistance is futile! It is always a real privilege helping those who want a little more info. I enjoy working with TSD practitioners as much as Japanese and Okinawan stylists. In fact, the respect level of some TSD schools in on a different scale. I really look forward to seeing some of you some time as well.
UPNORTH:
FINALLY, I finished the first installment of the video clip I had talked about. Sorry it took so long. I have decided that I am going to do a 2 minute or so lesson concerning many of the things discussed here (this one is 2:25). The first topic, as we had discussed, will be on the importance of the angles in the kata and why they are more important than people think. The next installment, which I have already started on, will be on stance work...where the changes came during the formation of Shotokan and beyond and some short insights from the stancework found in Okinawa.
Again, I am doing this simply because people are interested and have asked for it. It has actually been a pleasure putting this together. Perhaps this video method will be more productive than my typing method. Just remember, they are 2 minute clips demonstrating things that take years to understand. But, I think it looks pretty good and is easy to follow. I need to compress it still and then I will post it on my web-site for people to watch should they choose to. We can then put the link here unless you know of a better way to do it.
Best Regards to All
Rob
I must apologize...I read back through my post and the last sentence where I used the word "wrong" was inappropriate. It was not my intent to compare styles or flame any particular style...
I would like to mention, though, that the question was how to find more information on the Naihanchi. JT, your stance on the matter is very rigid and because of your devotion to the Korean method (which is admirable by the way), you are shutting the door on, not just "another way of doing it", but historical fact. In doing so, you are setting the example to others that they should not research their history. I just don't agree with this. Simply, to get a better understanding of Naihanchi...the history, the philosophy, and the higher meaning you MUST look elsewhere. I AM NOT talking about getting a higher understanding of how to punch or how to fight against a wall... everyone can work on that on their own. I have seen plenty of TSD people who can punch a hole through many an Okinawan stylist. What I am talking about is getting a higher understanding of Naihanchi as an actual historical document. And, you can't learn about the past if you are not willing to dig. Digging usually brings up things we are not too crazy about but we deal with it and move on. I have dug up plenty of my own skeletons during my journey that contradict truth but I have always been encouraged to bury those skeletons elsewhere and keep digging for the truth.
As an Okinawan stylist, I have also done my share of research. For example, research into Naihanchi always leads to Motobu Choki as this was the only kata he taught as he felt it contained everything one needs. So, who better to talk to about this than Motobu's son, Motobu Chosei Soke. Next thing you know, Motobu Sensei is in my living room eating dinner with my family. This year will be his third visit.
And it goes deeper. I have looked into the Chinese roots of Naihanchi and how it came to be in Okinawa focusing especially on the specialized tactics found in the kata. THIS is why when I hear about "fighting against a wall" I just can't let it go. It is just not historically accurate. If you want to modify the technique...any technique, to fight against a wall go for it. Every system on earth has it, including karate. Applying this tactical concept is essential to true self defense. But, everyone needs to admit that the reason they choose Naihanchi to use as a wall fighting kata is the pattern. You can do the same thing with any of the kata...this doesn't make them wall fighting kata as well. Historically speaking, the pattern is only there to help the practitioner remember the form. It lays no significance as to the meaning of the form...in fact, the movements were set in certain patterns and directions to INTENTIONALLY mislead on- lookers. In the case of Naihanchi, the originators were successful on a global scale!
There is no "mine is better" arguement here. However, at times, different instructors are going to have a "my historical perspective of this particular topic may be a bit more accurate than yours". But, that will only come out when a particular question is asked...as in this case concerning the research of Naihanchi. In my case, no offense is intended. I am trying to answer questions concerning a topic that always ends in a "mine is better than yours" arguement. I hope I can make my points without anyone going there. In college, I didn't think my professors were "better than me". They simply knew more about the subject than I did at the time and I was, in fact, the one asking the questions in an effort to learn more. If I started an arguement with a professor every time they corrected me I would still be in college.
Shotokan instructors go back to Okinawa all the time to learn the roots of what they learn. Some convert but most continue practicing Shotokan the way it was taught to them. TSD practitioners have a great art full of power, as well. Nobody is asking them to convert, either. Learning about the past is not going to "entice" one to convert. The roots of my family are in Scotland... it doesn't mean I want to start wearing a kilt. I am not the one asking the questions. It is TSD students who are asking the questions so that they can better understand what they are doing. All I am doing is answering the questions. Following the example of Shotokan and Okinawan karate practitioners alike, students must be encouraged to research the history of what they do. Tang, afterall, refers to China...not Korea. If you are not thinking about the "why" of that (beyond the technical definition), you're missing a really fun part of the journey. Karate, before it was called karate in Okinawa, was called Todi (To-China, Di- Hand) or as we say in Korean...Tang Soo. We are all linked brothers and sisters. Resistance is futile! It is always a real privilege helping those who want a little more info. I enjoy working with TSD practitioners as much as Japanese and Okinawan stylists. In fact, the respect level of some TSD schools in on a different scale. I really look forward to seeing some of you some time as well.
UPNORTH:
FINALLY, I finished the first installment of the video clip I had talked about. Sorry it took so long. I have decided that I am going to do a 2 minute or so lesson concerning many of the things discussed here (this one is 2:25). The first topic, as we had discussed, will be on the importance of the angles in the kata and why they are more important than people think. The next installment, which I have already started on, will be on stance work...where the changes came during the formation of Shotokan and beyond and some short insights from the stancework found in Okinawa.
Again, I am doing this simply because people are interested and have asked for it. It has actually been a pleasure putting this together. Perhaps this video method will be more productive than my typing method. Just remember, they are 2 minute clips demonstrating things that take years to understand. But, I think it looks pretty good and is easy to follow. I need to compress it still and then I will post it on my web-site for people to watch should they choose to. We can then put the link here unless you know of a better way to do it.
Best Regards to All
Rob
robertmrivers
Orange Belt
UPNORTH:
I read back over your curriculum and really respect the time you put into developing it. In the spirit of research, have you considered (perhaps you've done it already) finding the Korean terminology for the tricky terms like "Newaza" or "Kyusho" or even "Gall Bladder 20" (Feng Chi in Chinese, Gall bladder line in Japanese is Tan Kei). I think this information would be extremely beneficial to your students. It would also set you apart as I haven't seen a lot of Chinese to Japanese to Korean martial arts terminology reference books. Having something for the Kyusho (Tsubo) points in Korean would be pretty slick.
Just a thought. What you have looks great.
Rob
I read back over your curriculum and really respect the time you put into developing it. In the spirit of research, have you considered (perhaps you've done it already) finding the Korean terminology for the tricky terms like "Newaza" or "Kyusho" or even "Gall Bladder 20" (Feng Chi in Chinese, Gall bladder line in Japanese is Tan Kei). I think this information would be extremely beneficial to your students. It would also set you apart as I haven't seen a lot of Chinese to Japanese to Korean martial arts terminology reference books. Having something for the Kyusho (Tsubo) points in Korean would be pretty slick.
Just a thought. What you have looks great.
Rob
Master Jay S. Penfil
Blue Belt
Sensei Rivers,
This was an awesome posting, filled with great content as to thought process and a way to a deeper understanding of All of our arts.
The questions that I have at this time for JT the Ninja are:
1) What other system(s) of martial art have you trained in besides Tang Soo Do?
2) How many different associations have you trained with in Tang Soo Do, besides ITF?
3) In ITF, how many different Sa Bom NimÂ’s have you trained with (in different schools that do not train together on any regular basis)?
4) Beyond writing stuff on the internet discussion boards, how do you dig up the information that you use for your research?
I am asking these questions to you (JT the Ninja) to establish what expertise you truly bring to the table, and how you can be so tunnel versioned in a discussion that is participated in by so many others that have serious levels of experience that are above and beyond any of the Sa BomÂ’s that you are involved with in the ITF.
As you read this post and seek out the answers to the questions that I have asked understand that I am first and foremost a Korean system practitioner, and the senior student to the Moo Duk Kwan grandmaster viewed by EVERY one of the Korean grandmasters alive today as the best of the best to have ever come from the Moo Duk Kwan. I am in NO WAY “bashing Koreans…
I simply have an extensive history, most uncommon in the Tang Soo Do world with regard to what I have studied, and who I have had the honor and privilege of studying with.
As I stated to you on several of these posts already, we can go around for ever on this board espousing your opinion vs mine and never get anywhere. The best thing for you to do is take my offer seriously and make a trip to Detroit. I will open your eyes inside of one training session, and you wonÂ’t get hurt in any way, shape or form. One session and you will loose all of this fear of the unknown.
In the end, you will, as I do, still train in Tang Soo Do, but with a far greater understanding of what you are doing. The ITF simply doesnÂ’t teach these things, and you will never understand them if you donÂ’t experience them first handÂ…
I have been involved in Okinawan and Japanese martial arts longer then I have been involved with Korean martial arts. When I met Shihan Train in 1997 I already had a good understanding of the principles that we teach. What he was able to expose me to catapulted me LIGHTYEARS ahead of where I was. Every Tang Soo Do practitioner that I have shared these principles and concepts with has walked away from our training sessions with eyes wide open, and singing all kinds of praises for the information that had been exchanged.
Guess what!!! None of them have changed to studying Okinawan or Japanese martial arts. They are all still Tang Soo Do practitioners. They just have a deeper understanding for all that they have been taught and all that they will learn as time goes on.
Tang Soo Do came to us through KJN Hwang Kee, but he didnÂ’t originate it. He took a system of kata that had come from Shotokan and taught it to Koreans, who then moved around the globe and taught it to the rest of us. Shotokan was the brain-child of Gichen Funakoshi, but what he incorporated into it at its conception came from Okinawa (his homeland). The To Di (To Da-as I learned it) referred to by Sensei Rivers was the origin or the systems that we know as Tang Soo Do and Shotokan, as well as Shito Ryu, Wado Ryu, Goju Ryu and so on, and so on. Ryukuan Kempo is in there as well with its Tuite and Kyusho Jutsu. All of these systems came from the combination of Okinawan and Chinese systems merging their individual principles and concepts together.
When the Koreans returned from Japan with “Karate”, they had learned it from Funakoshi. Funakoshi didn’t know the Bunkai; he just taught the kata as an exercise. Funakoshi didn’t even learn the Pinan series from Itosu directly. He learned them from Kenwa Mabuni after he arrived in Japan. Mabuni didn’t teach Funakoshi the Bunkai either.
If the Koreans were learning the Kata from someone who didnÂ’t know the Bunkai, how could they teach it to you and me?
Training in the Okinawan and Japanese variants of our system has given me the knowledge and insight into what we should have learned from the beginning. Now we do.
Spend a little time and come visit meÂ… I donÂ’t bite, I just open eyes. When you return to your home dojang, everything that we have said will make perfect sense and you will be able to make the advancements that we have discussed in a much shorter timeframe then we did.
Sensei Rivers, I am looking forward to our interaction in the future. I will post the date of our April grand opening as soon as I have it.
I have to again, take a moment to thank John Kendrowski for helping manage this Tang Soo Do discussion board as he doesÂ… He is always on his toes, making sure that the topics are solid and thought provoking. We have enjoyed many great threads here as a result of his thoughtfulness.
Also, The weekend of May 19th & 20th I am hosting Sensei Vince Morris here in my school for a series of training session. The different sessions will be set up based on Gup/Kyu ranks. Dan ranks/ Senior Dan Ranks and one session for Law Enforcement ONLY.
Sensei Morris is originally from Brittan, and earned his 6th or 7th dan in Shotokan there under Asano Sensei. Sensei Morris also spent 6 years training with Oyata Sensei in Okinawa. I have participated in 2 previous seminars with him here in Michigan and I can tell you that he is among the worlds finest instructor of Bunkai.
EVERYONE is welcome to come and participate for this weekend of awesome training!!! Contact me directly for more information.
Yours in Tang Soo Do,
Master Jay S. Penfil
TANG SOO!!!
This was an awesome posting, filled with great content as to thought process and a way to a deeper understanding of All of our arts.
The questions that I have at this time for JT the Ninja are:
1) What other system(s) of martial art have you trained in besides Tang Soo Do?
2) How many different associations have you trained with in Tang Soo Do, besides ITF?
3) In ITF, how many different Sa Bom NimÂ’s have you trained with (in different schools that do not train together on any regular basis)?
4) Beyond writing stuff on the internet discussion boards, how do you dig up the information that you use for your research?
I am asking these questions to you (JT the Ninja) to establish what expertise you truly bring to the table, and how you can be so tunnel versioned in a discussion that is participated in by so many others that have serious levels of experience that are above and beyond any of the Sa BomÂ’s that you are involved with in the ITF.
As you read this post and seek out the answers to the questions that I have asked understand that I am first and foremost a Korean system practitioner, and the senior student to the Moo Duk Kwan grandmaster viewed by EVERY one of the Korean grandmasters alive today as the best of the best to have ever come from the Moo Duk Kwan. I am in NO WAY “bashing Koreans…
I simply have an extensive history, most uncommon in the Tang Soo Do world with regard to what I have studied, and who I have had the honor and privilege of studying with.
As I stated to you on several of these posts already, we can go around for ever on this board espousing your opinion vs mine and never get anywhere. The best thing for you to do is take my offer seriously and make a trip to Detroit. I will open your eyes inside of one training session, and you wonÂ’t get hurt in any way, shape or form. One session and you will loose all of this fear of the unknown.
In the end, you will, as I do, still train in Tang Soo Do, but with a far greater understanding of what you are doing. The ITF simply doesnÂ’t teach these things, and you will never understand them if you donÂ’t experience them first handÂ…
I have been involved in Okinawan and Japanese martial arts longer then I have been involved with Korean martial arts. When I met Shihan Train in 1997 I already had a good understanding of the principles that we teach. What he was able to expose me to catapulted me LIGHTYEARS ahead of where I was. Every Tang Soo Do practitioner that I have shared these principles and concepts with has walked away from our training sessions with eyes wide open, and singing all kinds of praises for the information that had been exchanged.
Guess what!!! None of them have changed to studying Okinawan or Japanese martial arts. They are all still Tang Soo Do practitioners. They just have a deeper understanding for all that they have been taught and all that they will learn as time goes on.
Tang Soo Do came to us through KJN Hwang Kee, but he didnÂ’t originate it. He took a system of kata that had come from Shotokan and taught it to Koreans, who then moved around the globe and taught it to the rest of us. Shotokan was the brain-child of Gichen Funakoshi, but what he incorporated into it at its conception came from Okinawa (his homeland). The To Di (To Da-as I learned it) referred to by Sensei Rivers was the origin or the systems that we know as Tang Soo Do and Shotokan, as well as Shito Ryu, Wado Ryu, Goju Ryu and so on, and so on. Ryukuan Kempo is in there as well with its Tuite and Kyusho Jutsu. All of these systems came from the combination of Okinawan and Chinese systems merging their individual principles and concepts together.
When the Koreans returned from Japan with “Karate”, they had learned it from Funakoshi. Funakoshi didn’t know the Bunkai; he just taught the kata as an exercise. Funakoshi didn’t even learn the Pinan series from Itosu directly. He learned them from Kenwa Mabuni after he arrived in Japan. Mabuni didn’t teach Funakoshi the Bunkai either.
If the Koreans were learning the Kata from someone who didnÂ’t know the Bunkai, how could they teach it to you and me?
Training in the Okinawan and Japanese variants of our system has given me the knowledge and insight into what we should have learned from the beginning. Now we do.
Spend a little time and come visit meÂ… I donÂ’t bite, I just open eyes. When you return to your home dojang, everything that we have said will make perfect sense and you will be able to make the advancements that we have discussed in a much shorter timeframe then we did.
Sensei Rivers, I am looking forward to our interaction in the future. I will post the date of our April grand opening as soon as I have it.
I have to again, take a moment to thank John Kendrowski for helping manage this Tang Soo Do discussion board as he doesÂ… He is always on his toes, making sure that the topics are solid and thought provoking. We have enjoyed many great threads here as a result of his thoughtfulness.
Also, The weekend of May 19th & 20th I am hosting Sensei Vince Morris here in my school for a series of training session. The different sessions will be set up based on Gup/Kyu ranks. Dan ranks/ Senior Dan Ranks and one session for Law Enforcement ONLY.
Sensei Morris is originally from Brittan, and earned his 6th or 7th dan in Shotokan there under Asano Sensei. Sensei Morris also spent 6 years training with Oyata Sensei in Okinawa. I have participated in 2 previous seminars with him here in Michigan and I can tell you that he is among the worlds finest instructor of Bunkai.
EVERYONE is welcome to come and participate for this weekend of awesome training!!! Contact me directly for more information.
Yours in Tang Soo Do,
Master Jay S. Penfil
TANG SOO!!!
This is overall a terrific post, M. JSP. Here's my question: Funakoshi is said to have trained exclusively with the Naihanchi kata set for almost a decade. What was he actually doing with it? I gather from what you write that he didn't actually train the oyo for the Okinawan bunkai? But nine years seems an awfully long time just to do the performance... Was it that Itosu and Mabuni didn't actually discuss the bunkai with him because he wasn't at that level, in their estimation—not quite good enough to be entrusted with the true apps encoded in the movements?
I ask only because there seems to be this lingering sense in various places that the real combat superstars of that era, like Motobu and others, didn't actually think much of GF as a technician/combatant, but that he was a first-class self-promoter and was better than anyone else at marketing karate (and himself). Does any of this have the ring of truth?
JT_the_Ninja
Black Belt
Master Jay:
1) None. I'm a Tang Soo Do student, there's not enough time or physical energy to train in another style, at least not for me. I practice one art as hard as I can push my body, so what I can do I can do better than if I spread myself around.
2) None. I don't consider that to be a requisite. I train under Sa Bom Nim Robert Venturino at the Oakmont C.S. Kim Karate school, International TSD Federation.
3) Although I almost exclusively train at my home school in Oakmont (I don't have a car or the money to be driving everywhere), I have trained at the main dojang in Monroeville, under C.S. Kim personally. That is also where I take my recertification tests. Through those, I've come into contact with other kyo sa nim and sa bom nim around the area. I also go to the National All-Martial Arts Tournament sponsored by Master Kim every year, held in Pittsburgh (again, I don't have a car or money, so I go to tournaments when I can and where I can), so that I can meet and compete against practicioners from other schools, not just TSD. If you want to "enlighten" me, I'll be there this May.
4) I learn what I learn in class, from my sa bom nims. What I say is what I've learned in class and as I practice the forms myself. Note that I have identified myself several times as an e-dan; I'm nowhere near a master.
What all of you don't seem to realize is that while I entirely respect other martial arts and their forms, especially ones from which TSD got its forms (btw, Hwang Kee didn't bring TSD to Korea --- TSD has been studied for centuries, as historical evidence shows), I do recognize that I train under TSD, so whatever similarities the forms I have learned will have with those of other styles, they are still separate forms, with potentially very different moves and different applications. I do not judge any form based on its moves, nor do I care if some people do some techniques differently due to style differences. All I ask is that nobody tell me that TSD is really only a debased or copied version of another martial art. The people who created and shaped TSD through the years got their ideas from all over the place: the Tang in Tang Soo Do is a reference to the Tang dynasty in China, and even on my dobok there are Chinese characters (according to the Korean mode). I fully accept that not all of the moves and forms of my style were created out of the blue by the original TSD masters.
I also fully believe, however, that the forms as they exist in TSD today are just as valid, and to learn them is to do them and to learn them well is to study what each move does. That does not implicitly require me going back previous to the creation of TSD to learn how to do do what has been handed down, in one form or another, over the 1500-year history of Tang Soo Do.
robertmrivers: I realize my post to you was a bit incensed, but I've put up with people downplaying the validity of TSD for a while now. Sorry for whatever undue offense you took from that. You will admit, though, that it sounds a bit odd for someone who doesn't study TSD to be lecturing those who do. You might also note that I didn't hinge my respect of the keema hyung completely on them being useful when you're against a wall; I like them more because they focus on movement control, timing, and proper technique. For being among the shortest of hyung, they pack a punch.
1) None. I'm a Tang Soo Do student, there's not enough time or physical energy to train in another style, at least not for me. I practice one art as hard as I can push my body, so what I can do I can do better than if I spread myself around.
2) None. I don't consider that to be a requisite. I train under Sa Bom Nim Robert Venturino at the Oakmont C.S. Kim Karate school, International TSD Federation.
3) Although I almost exclusively train at my home school in Oakmont (I don't have a car or the money to be driving everywhere), I have trained at the main dojang in Monroeville, under C.S. Kim personally. That is also where I take my recertification tests. Through those, I've come into contact with other kyo sa nim and sa bom nim around the area. I also go to the National All-Martial Arts Tournament sponsored by Master Kim every year, held in Pittsburgh (again, I don't have a car or money, so I go to tournaments when I can and where I can), so that I can meet and compete against practicioners from other schools, not just TSD. If you want to "enlighten" me, I'll be there this May.
4) I learn what I learn in class, from my sa bom nims. What I say is what I've learned in class and as I practice the forms myself. Note that I have identified myself several times as an e-dan; I'm nowhere near a master.
What all of you don't seem to realize is that while I entirely respect other martial arts and their forms, especially ones from which TSD got its forms (btw, Hwang Kee didn't bring TSD to Korea --- TSD has been studied for centuries, as historical evidence shows), I do recognize that I train under TSD, so whatever similarities the forms I have learned will have with those of other styles, they are still separate forms, with potentially very different moves and different applications. I do not judge any form based on its moves, nor do I care if some people do some techniques differently due to style differences. All I ask is that nobody tell me that TSD is really only a debased or copied version of another martial art. The people who created and shaped TSD through the years got their ideas from all over the place: the Tang in Tang Soo Do is a reference to the Tang dynasty in China, and even on my dobok there are Chinese characters (according to the Korean mode). I fully accept that not all of the moves and forms of my style were created out of the blue by the original TSD masters.
I also fully believe, however, that the forms as they exist in TSD today are just as valid, and to learn them is to do them and to learn them well is to study what each move does. That does not implicitly require me going back previous to the creation of TSD to learn how to do do what has been handed down, in one form or another, over the 1500-year history of Tang Soo Do.
robertmrivers: I realize my post to you was a bit incensed, but I've put up with people downplaying the validity of TSD for a while now. Sorry for whatever undue offense you took from that. You will admit, though, that it sounds a bit odd for someone who doesn't study TSD to be lecturing those who do. You might also note that I didn't hinge my respect of the keema hyung completely on them being useful when you're against a wall; I like them more because they focus on movement control, timing, and proper technique. For being among the shortest of hyung, they pack a punch.
No, it hasn't. And you have absolutely no documentation to support this dojang fantasy-lore, because there is none for those time-depths in Manchuria and Korea. If you bother to consult the work of the two professional MA historians who've spent more time than anyone else studying the history of KMA, Daking Burdick (JAMA, 1997) and Stanley Henning (JAMA, 2000) you'll learn (i) that there is absolutely no reliable documentation for what was going on on the Korean peninsula 1500 years ago, that the earliest MAs in Korea that there's any documentation for are Chinese boxing/wrestling styles, (ii) there is no archaeological evidence, in the form of tomb-cluster paintings/scultpure or anything else that support the presence of a uniquely Korean MA at ancient time depths, and (iii) that Tang Soo Do and Kong Soo Do were interchangeable terms for the arts that the Kwan founders brought back from Korea after training under Okinawan karateka in Shotokan, Shudokan and Gojo-ryu styles, names they themselves gave to what they taught, both of which are cognates for karate (`China hand/empty hand').
To the extent that it's possible make any sense of this text, it's clear that you've seriously missed the point here too, apparently. The Kwan founders came back with the various kata without applications for those kata. The bunkai, the technical application of kata movements as combat moves, were not taught to the Kwan founders for the most part. If you do a little actual research you'll find that by the time the Kwan founders started studying their karate, the basis of dojo training was no longer the one-on-one or few-on-one kata-based tech application approach that was common in Okinawa thirty years earlier, but the mass training kihon regime with very little in the way of bunkai application, if any. And it's not at all clear that the Kwan founders put much energy, if any, into recovering the original bunkai that were the whole point of the kata. More and more, it's evident from people who were there, and their students, that training consisted of isolated tech practice, mass-movement kihon drills, and all the stuff that the Kwan founders themselves underwent as students. Period.
Huh? What are you saying here?? You don't judge any forms based on its moves... You mean, you're not judging how good the form is?? You're not supposed to do that, so why would you?? What you are supposed to do is extract the combat applications of kata moves. That's what bunkai is, and that's what Jep is asking about: in-depth study and analysis of Naihanchi, if I recall more or less correctly. And who said anything about different techs due to style differences? Regardless of style, two given interpretations of a kata/hyung move may be equally effective, or not. There is a whole literature on what makes one bunkai, one set of combat interpretations, more street-effective than another; look at Burgar's Five Years, One Kata or Wilder and Kane's The Way of Kata, if you need to have the checklists spelled out for you.
Do you actually read the posts that the (extremely!) patient respondents to your own posts send you?? Who has said that KMAs are a `debased/copied' version of anything? But whether you like it or not, the technical content of KMA is deeply and primarily tied to the technical content of the Okinawan arts those Korean systems are built on—and yes, JT, there is a well-documented history which shows that KMAs are built on a O/JKMA platform, regardless of how much someone might wish it weren't so.
This is just one long, red herring. There is a history to TSD which Upnorthkyosa and Master Penfil are thoroughly steeped in and have studied extensively, and what they are trying to tell you is based on years of study and historical research, not dojang rumor.
Again the mythical 1500/2000/2500 year-old history of TSD/TKD... would you care to cite even one primary source for this claim? Are you aware that the earliest references to Korean MAs are in the 15th c. Koryo History—which makes it clear that the content of Korean warfare arts were entirely based on Chinese systems? 1500 years?? What are you talking about?
No, you haven't. No one has downplayed the validity of TSD. It's Master Penfil's whole lifework and career; you're saying he's downplaying it? What people are criticizing isn't TSD. It's your technical and historical knowledge of TSD and KMAs generally that they're criticizing. Don't confuse the two.
Learn a bit more, and learn to treat the advice and knowledge of genuine masters in their arts with a bit more respect, if you want to get a fair hearing for your opinions. You're going about it 180º the wrong way, so far. Meanwhile, you've managed to derail the whole thread, which was a request by Jep for reliable, in-depth information about Naihanchi—information which a number of people have tried to provide him, and which you've responded to with a mixture of fantasy history and defenses of TSD against attacks that no one who's posted has actually made. If you don't want to contribute a substantive response to Jep's query, fine, but if not, would you mind letting the thread stay on topic for just a little while? It would be much appreciated.
robertmrivers
Orange Belt
Exile,
You brought up some of the recognized sources that set straight the sometimes slanted history of TSD and the other Korean arts. Unfortunately, many people think that it is an attack on TSD but it isn't. The truth is what it is.
Another source I am not sure you all have bookmarked is the Dragon Times article (volume 22) featuring an article by Dr. Robert Dhrenwend called "The Truth About Tae Kwon Do: An Historical Appraisal."
One Comment:
"...In the early 1950's the South Korean government interfered with karate in Korea with the intent of converting it into a major new competitive sport, one that the Koreans could dominate and which would bring international recognition and prestige to Korea. This new martial art/ sport was to be 100% indigenous, tracing its history to the origins of the Korean people. In their rush to give their brand new martial sport a spurious pedigree reaching back into the dim mists of antiquity, the fact that there were no indigenous Korean martial arts seems to have been regarded as irrelevent. The pitiful sham history that resulted has had evil effects on Tae Kwon Do, both in its development as a sport and for its validity as a martial art."- Dohrenwend, p. 10
You will have to order a back issue...I actually typed this. The article covers Korean martial history at great length and the list of sources (all 65 of them) should be in the library of any Korean stylist. I might be able to scan it and use OCR to convert it. Never thought about that... let me know if you would like a copy.
What does this mean to Korean stylists? NOTHING. If you train hard, keep an open mind, and always seek the truth it does not matter what martial art one chooses to study. Having solid forms but being able to back up the movements historically and technically beyond what is normally taught gives one enormous confidence and power.
JT. No worries. I didn't realize your age when we started talking about this. It would actually be best for you to train exactly the way your instructor tells you to. It is certainly not our place to try and convince you of things that you simply have not been exposed to and that we have been researching for a longer time. This topic is hard to cover and should be introduced gradually. I would suggest, however, that before you put yourself into a discussion where people of considerable rank and experience are discussing things you don't understand completely, that you really do your homework. And I don't mean this in a condescending way. In any facet of life...martial arts, school, business, whatever, you have to be able to back up the information with reliable sources, written as well as personal.
Also, for the record, I was not lecturing. Again, a question was asked and I answered it. TSD instructors ask me questions all of the time and I do my best to answer respectfully. Questions range from "Why do we do a back stance and karate uses a cat stance?" to the classic "Pinan Nidan, Heian Shodan, Pinahn Chodan" discussion. When you consider the direction this COULD have gone with other Karate forumites, I thought I was pretty tame. My goal is to help people get a hold of information that isn't that easy to get from an actual human being. Say when and where and I'd be happy toshow anyone some of these things personally...no strings attached. If not, there are plenty of books I would recommend as well to further understanding of the kata mindset.
Anyway... if there are any other questions concerning Naihanchi I might be able to reference a book for you or offer my opinion.
Regards
Rob
You brought up some of the recognized sources that set straight the sometimes slanted history of TSD and the other Korean arts. Unfortunately, many people think that it is an attack on TSD but it isn't. The truth is what it is.
Another source I am not sure you all have bookmarked is the Dragon Times article (volume 22) featuring an article by Dr. Robert Dhrenwend called "The Truth About Tae Kwon Do: An Historical Appraisal."
One Comment:
"...In the early 1950's the South Korean government interfered with karate in Korea with the intent of converting it into a major new competitive sport, one that the Koreans could dominate and which would bring international recognition and prestige to Korea. This new martial art/ sport was to be 100% indigenous, tracing its history to the origins of the Korean people. In their rush to give their brand new martial sport a spurious pedigree reaching back into the dim mists of antiquity, the fact that there were no indigenous Korean martial arts seems to have been regarded as irrelevent. The pitiful sham history that resulted has had evil effects on Tae Kwon Do, both in its development as a sport and for its validity as a martial art."- Dohrenwend, p. 10
You will have to order a back issue...I actually typed this. The article covers Korean martial history at great length and the list of sources (all 65 of them) should be in the library of any Korean stylist. I might be able to scan it and use OCR to convert it. Never thought about that... let me know if you would like a copy.
What does this mean to Korean stylists? NOTHING. If you train hard, keep an open mind, and always seek the truth it does not matter what martial art one chooses to study. Having solid forms but being able to back up the movements historically and technically beyond what is normally taught gives one enormous confidence and power.
JT. No worries. I didn't realize your age when we started talking about this. It would actually be best for you to train exactly the way your instructor tells you to. It is certainly not our place to try and convince you of things that you simply have not been exposed to and that we have been researching for a longer time. This topic is hard to cover and should be introduced gradually. I would suggest, however, that before you put yourself into a discussion where people of considerable rank and experience are discussing things you don't understand completely, that you really do your homework. And I don't mean this in a condescending way. In any facet of life...martial arts, school, business, whatever, you have to be able to back up the information with reliable sources, written as well as personal.
Also, for the record, I was not lecturing. Again, a question was asked and I answered it. TSD instructors ask me questions all of the time and I do my best to answer respectfully. Questions range from "Why do we do a back stance and karate uses a cat stance?" to the classic "Pinan Nidan, Heian Shodan, Pinahn Chodan" discussion. When you consider the direction this COULD have gone with other Karate forumites, I thought I was pretty tame. My goal is to help people get a hold of information that isn't that easy to get from an actual human being. Say when and where and I'd be happy toshow anyone some of these things personally...no strings attached. If not, there are plenty of books I would recommend as well to further understanding of the kata mindset.
Anyway... if there are any other questions concerning Naihanchi I might be able to reference a book for you or offer my opinion.
Regards
Rob
Sensei Rivers
Regarding Naihanchi 1-3, there are lots of stories regarding the history of these hyungs. From what I've been able to gather, Naihanchi Chodan was the original and its origins are rather obscure. The other two, however, I've read that they were created by Itosu Sensei. Why did he do this? There are so many applications for Naihanchi Chodan that the other two seem redundant.
Although, I have to say that the third one is really cool...
upnorthkyosa
Regarding Naihanchi 1-3, there are lots of stories regarding the history of these hyungs. From what I've been able to gather, Naihanchi Chodan was the original and its origins are rather obscure. The other two, however, I've read that they were created by Itosu Sensei. Why did he do this? There are so many applications for Naihanchi Chodan that the other two seem redundant.
Although, I have to say that the third one is really cool...
upnorthkyosa
Hey Rob, a million thanks for the additional info. There is a great book on the history of KMAs, not the facade of legend which typically passes for it, waiting to be written, and it seems to me that you or Master Penfil or both of you are logical people to write it!
Thanks again...
robertmrivers
Orange Belt
Exile
I'll get right on that...what do you think Master Penfil... a coordinated effort!!!
Yeesh...I can't even imagine. I am working on one now that is in my subject area and it is still pretty time consuming. Reviewing Korean history would definitely take a while. But, who knows...there may be some interest in it.
I just posted the video I was speaking of. It is super basic...not high quality...and is only one small example (about 2.5 minutes). But it was fun making it. I've got a second being worked on now that I hope to have up in a week or so. Sorry it is not streaming. I am also going to put a .wmv version up as well. But, this thing started life as an AVI at about 325 MB. I've got it compressed down to about 11 MB. It has a little audio sync problem in the middle but I think it gets the point across. Maybe upnorth can play with it and put it somewhere productive.
Link is here: http://www.virginiakempo.com/martial_minute.htm
Even gave it a catchy little name...
I have had several questions asked by my students that I will address through this format as well as from Jujutsu, American Kempo, Shotokan and KMA practitioners. So, I already have a pretty good line up developing. Hopefully I can take advantage of the "picture is worth a thousand words" philosophy... I am the worst at typing!
Regards
Rob
I'll get right on that...what do you think Master Penfil... a coordinated effort!!!
Yeesh...I can't even imagine. I am working on one now that is in my subject area and it is still pretty time consuming. Reviewing Korean history would definitely take a while. But, who knows...there may be some interest in it.
I just posted the video I was speaking of. It is super basic...not high quality...and is only one small example (about 2.5 minutes). But it was fun making it. I've got a second being worked on now that I hope to have up in a week or so. Sorry it is not streaming. I am also going to put a .wmv version up as well. But, this thing started life as an AVI at about 325 MB. I've got it compressed down to about 11 MB. It has a little audio sync problem in the middle but I think it gets the point across. Maybe upnorth can play with it and put it somewhere productive.
Link is here: http://www.virginiakempo.com/martial_minute.htm
Even gave it a catchy little name...
I have had several questions asked by my students that I will address through this format as well as from Jujutsu, American Kempo, Shotokan and KMA practitioners. So, I already have a pretty good line up developing. Hopefully I can take advantage of the "picture is worth a thousand words" philosophy... I am the worst at typing!
Regards
Rob
Well, you've got a customer waiting, cash in hand!
There'd be a lot of interest in something like that. A condensed summary of the true state of MA in ancient Korea, a compilation of the best evidence for the MA situation in the 19th century, and a careful working-out of just how, and which, strands of Okinawan karate went to Korea, filtered through the teachings of the expatriate Okinawans like Funakoshi who struck it rich teaching a diluted karate/tuite to Japanese university students, and how these strands were woven together to form kwan-era curricula and training methods, with as much description as we have evidence for regarding just what went on in the kwan training sessions... it would be a revelation to an awful lot of people who have been as bamboozled as JT appears to be about the history of the KMAs. People need to understand just why you cannot understand where the technical content of the Korean striking arts came from without understanding the Okinawan karate sources (and their modification in the landscape of prewar Japan) which were essentially the whole content of the KMAs in the prewar period, fantasies about taekkyon and ancient indigenous arts preserved by hermit monks in remote monasteries notwithstanding. And as I say, you guys are ideally equipped with the expertise to do it.
I'll give it a try—I use a Mac platform, so wmv files are inaccessible to me. But let me see if I've got the drivers to handle this vid.
This is great stuff, Rob! Listen... you said something about scanning that Dragon Times article with that great passage you sent me. I don't want to make work for you... but... if you do decide to do it, will you please keep me posted about it? Actually, quite a few people in the KMA fora will be interested, I'm sure....
And thanks, yet again, for all your efforts in this area!
robertmrivers
Orange Belt
Upnorth
didn't know if you had seen this one. This is from a pretty popular bio on Sokon Matsumura, this particular one from shitokai.com. It pretty much echoes everything I have heard...
"It is said by some that a Chinese master by the name of Ason taught a Chinese kata by the name of Naifanchin in the area of Naha. Some say that the kata was taught in Naha-te for a while (but is no longer had in Naha-te styles.) Matsumura studied from Ason for a time. Later, Matsumura took this kata and broke it up into two parts: Naifanchin Shodan and Nidan. The origin of Naihanchi Sandan is more obscure. It is not a Matsumura kata at all, but it may have its origin in Ason's system also."
An interesting tidbit about Naihanchi... Motobu Choki studied under Itosu but he also studied extensively under Matsumora (Kosaku...not Sokon Matsumura). During a conversation I had with Motobu Chosei, Soke, he explained that his father urged his students to practice his version of Naihanchi only...and not practice Itosu's version. I am not sure why, but perhaps Itosu and Matsumora had different training philosophies and Motobu chose Matsumora's (speculation) in combination with his own revelations.
Motobu Choki did not do Naihanchi Sandan...this may be a clue when creating a timeline for the immergance of #3. Perhaps Itosu did create it. I am sure, using the time reference, that it was created after Naihanchi 1 and 2 were formalized. But, I am not 100% sure. The version of Naihanchi Sandan I practice is from the Tozan Ryu of Shinsuke Kaneshima, a student of Shigeru Nakamura and Choki Motobu. Tozan Ryu's Naihanchi series is different than the Motobu Ryu and more similar to the way Okinawan Kenpo of Nakamura lineage do it. But, as Motobu Ryu does not have a Sandan, I had to pick it up somewhere... it is definitely a fun kata. But, I find that once you know 1 and 2... 3 seems to be the redundant one. Sandan certainly has fun timing changes in it and the added length provides more of a workout.
Anyway, sorry I can't be of more help on that one... as there is no written documentation it is hard to say.
Regards
Rob
didn't know if you had seen this one. This is from a pretty popular bio on Sokon Matsumura, this particular one from shitokai.com. It pretty much echoes everything I have heard...
"It is said by some that a Chinese master by the name of Ason taught a Chinese kata by the name of Naifanchin in the area of Naha. Some say that the kata was taught in Naha-te for a while (but is no longer had in Naha-te styles.) Matsumura studied from Ason for a time. Later, Matsumura took this kata and broke it up into two parts: Naifanchin Shodan and Nidan. The origin of Naihanchi Sandan is more obscure. It is not a Matsumura kata at all, but it may have its origin in Ason's system also."
An interesting tidbit about Naihanchi... Motobu Choki studied under Itosu but he also studied extensively under Matsumora (Kosaku...not Sokon Matsumura). During a conversation I had with Motobu Chosei, Soke, he explained that his father urged his students to practice his version of Naihanchi only...and not practice Itosu's version. I am not sure why, but perhaps Itosu and Matsumora had different training philosophies and Motobu chose Matsumora's (speculation) in combination with his own revelations.
Motobu Choki did not do Naihanchi Sandan...this may be a clue when creating a timeline for the immergance of #3. Perhaps Itosu did create it. I am sure, using the time reference, that it was created after Naihanchi 1 and 2 were formalized. But, I am not 100% sure. The version of Naihanchi Sandan I practice is from the Tozan Ryu of Shinsuke Kaneshima, a student of Shigeru Nakamura and Choki Motobu. Tozan Ryu's Naihanchi series is different than the Motobu Ryu and more similar to the way Okinawan Kenpo of Nakamura lineage do it. But, as Motobu Ryu does not have a Sandan, I had to pick it up somewhere... it is definitely a fun kata. But, I find that once you know 1 and 2... 3 seems to be the redundant one. Sandan certainly has fun timing changes in it and the added length provides more of a workout.
Anyway, sorry I can't be of more help on that one... as there is no written documentation it is hard to say.
Regards
Rob
robertmrivers
Orange Belt
Exile
Re:
If it is as easy as the ast OCR attempt I made at work it actually might happen. Will let you know in the morning.
Rob
Re:
If it is as easy as the ast OCR attempt I made at work it actually might happen. Will let you know in the morning.
Rob
Terrific, I'll await your message! :asian:
I've read that before and I've read some other contradictory information, but hearing it from a higher level Okinawan-te practicioner definitely carries a little more weight. Will it ever be possible to peice together a distinct lineage for this stuff, or was so much information lost during WWII that it will be impossible?
Here is something that kind of throws a monkey wrench in to what is written by Matsumura. In our version of Naihanchi Chodan (I've attached it at the bottom) there is a distinct opening and closing move. Both Ee and Sam dan start from the ready stance (choon be). Why does chodan have the distinctive opening move and the others do not? Does your version of these forms have a similar characteristic?
The reason I ask is because I'm wondering at how much our hyung has changed from the original version of this kata.
This is a great video and you are right, its very basic, but it's also absolutely essential for TSD people to see. Discussion of these aspects of the forms almost completely missing in most TSD/SBD dojangs.
Anyway, with your permission, I'd like to ask the site administrator to host the video on his site so I can share this with my teacher and my students. This is a different perspective then the one that I approach this move.
I see the angles as evasions and counterattacks followed by a throw that puts uke on his back. If you think of this section as a series of three moves, the first is the initial defense and counter attack. The 45 degree angle sets up strikes to li-18 and gb 24 and the third-combined with the directional change, shows the throw.
IMO, this video needs its own thread. I noticed that you are online now, would you care to start it and add your own explanation?
